EFnet IRC Network Forum

as you can see from now hybrid in most people's opinion is not an oper god mode irc. opers can not do a lot of stuff that they can on unreal and other such ircds. hybrid is the ircd where i have seen that opers get the least power. but as irc is getting more complicated and attackers are getting harder to find with things such as single connection floods and DDoS nets that are largely appearing on the internet do you think that hybrid will require opers to have more power to really control their server? i think that hybrid is already drifting towards this as you can see the operspy commands in hybrid 6.4.

The fact opers on efnet don't have as much "power" as on other networks using different IRCd's is hardly because of hybrid. Those limitations are there for a good reason, because the administration and most users choose for it to be that way.

I'm sure any feature regarding "power" could be added to hybrid easily if it was wanted.

Many people feel the tools available to operators are quite sufficient.

Hybrid has nothing to do with the lack of "power" that you refer to. Hybrid can easily be modified (and has been) to allow opers to have more control over the users and the network.

-wassup- wrote:hybrid is the ircd where i have seen that opers get the least power.

id say ircnets ircd wins hands down on opers having the least power. You have to patch it to even be able to kline via the ircd :P.

-wassup- wrote:i think that hybrid is already drifting towards this as you can see the operspy commands in hybrid 6.4.

This feature was voted on and approved by the efnet admins, efnet admins chose they wanted it implementing, not hybrid.

corrupt wrote:Hybrid has nothing to do with the lack of "power" that you refer to. Hybrid can easily be modified (and has been) to allow opers to have more control over the users and the network.

ie http://ircd.botbay.net/pub/hybrid/4-Hackops/. Typically, making some sort of "more-oper-power" patch is the first thing peole do when they learn to modify ircd, so there seems to be more of these types of patches than any other.

leeh wrote:id say ircnets ircd wins hands down on opers having the least power. You have to patch it to even be able to kline via the ircd :P.

Don't forget tkserv ;) Technically not the ircd but it IS included.

the biggest annoyance i have had right now is lots and _LOTS_ of single connection flood bots.

-wassup- wrote:(snip) but as irc is getting more complicated and attackers are getting harder to find with things such as single connection floods and DDoS nets that are largely appearing on the internet do you think that hybrid will require opers to have more power to really control their server? (snip)

We also have another problem, it's the administration of some servers: take prison.net for example, who will accept almost everyone, even the non-ident open-socks floodbots ones. Someone will tell me that prison has some script that will kill them if flood is detected, but unfortunately, the flood already made its acceptable damage, and the stupid server will let the floodbot back in 2 minutes later. In the other hand, you can't idle (go to the bathroom and come back) without being disconnected. This is RE-DICULOUS. Is that what we call having control on a server?

We also have some hitler-like IRC admins who will decide he doesn't like IRC vhosts and has to kill 'em all, but to connect to it, you have to live in his weird place on earth OR use a hostname he'll like. IMHO, SpamDNS should work on *.aol.com as aol is a spam warehouse

EFnet also stopped improving because of concentric's servers which filters out *everything* except the modes it knows, and the author was no longer developping it, was in routing commitee, and everything... Just think of the time when Hybrid came out with the +e mode enabled by default.

Uhm. It is an admins right to choose what clients will be able to connect to his server. A lot of times, its not even the admin. Take Umich for example. Umich has very strict filters, at its border, before the IRC server -- which means only a select few clients can connect to it. If you don't like the way EFNet operates, you can go elsewhere, kthnx.

tabarnac wrote:

-wassup- wrote:(snip) but as irc is getting more complicated and attackers are getting harder to find with things such as single connection floods and DDoS nets that are largely appearing on the internet do you think that hybrid will require opers to have more power to really control their server? (snip)

We also have another problem, it's the administration of some servers: take prison.net for example, who will accept almost everyone, even the non-ident open-socks floodbots ones. Someone will tell me that prison has some script that will kill them if flood is detected, but unfortunately, the flood already made its acceptable damage, and the stupid server will let the floodbot back in 2 minutes later. In the other hand, you can't idle (go to the bathroom and come back) without being disconnected. This is RE-DICULOUS. Is that what we call having control on a server?

We also have some hitler-like IRC admins who will decide he doesn't like IRC vhosts and has to kill 'em all, but to connect to it, you have to live in his weird place on earth OR use a hostname he'll like. IMHO, SpamDNS should work on *.aol.com as aol is a spam warehouse

EFnet also stopped improving because of concentric's servers which filters out *everything* except the modes it knows, and the author was no longer developping it, was in routing commitee, and everything... Just think of the time when Hybrid came out with the +e mode enabled by default.

I believe the standard response is "if you don't like what one particular server is doing, don't use that server." You've been around long enough not to harp on two servers out of 35 that you can connect to.

corrupt wrote: If you don't like the way EFNet operates, you can go elsewhere, kthnx.

this is not mean to be attacking efnet....i am talking about my server here. i do run an IRC server and this is what i am having problems on. i do barely go on efnet and when i do its just on #hybrid.coders

Pills wrote: I believe the standard response is "if you don't like what one particular server is doing, don't use that server." You've been around long enough not to harp on two servers out of 35 that you can connect to.

first of all if the floodnets join a single channel it doesnt matter which channel ur on ....secondly its my irc server and i only have one server to connect to

Pills wrote:I believe the standard response is "if you don't like what one particular server is doing, don't use that server."

True. My point was, as said in the topic, giving more control to opers. If prison or the aformentionned hitler-like admin'ed servers start doing their s**t network-wide, it won't be pretty.

Not using a server is not either gonna solve the flooding/abuse problem. When this happens, you'll see idling opers or I'm busy ignoring you opers, on prison, and the only cooperative oper you'll find (on any server) won't be able to help you fixing the flood problem.

As it's a good thing for each server's admin to choose who can get in or not, allow Gline or not, allow this or not, there's too much manual work to be done (read: place a k-line on each individual 35+ client servers, good luck finding 1 active oper on each server!!!) when you'd need a network-wide ban to be placed, and fast.
See what's missing, a way to place a temporary network-wide ban until an active oper wakes up and takes care of it, and an active network banlist that gets spread and updated/transfered when a server links in, used with a GOOD ABUSE REASON (revenge is not a good reason)

tabarnac wrote:Not using a server is not either gonna solve the flooding/abuse problem. When this happens, you'll see idling opers or I'm busy ignoring you opers, on prison, and the only cooperative oper you'll find (on any server) won't be able to help you fixing the flood problem.

maybe its how you approach opers or something.... cause i've never ever had a problem finding a prison oper.

tabarnac wrote:As it's a good thing for each server's admin to choose who can get in or not, allow Gline or not, allow this or not, there's too much manual work to be done (read: place a k-line on each individual 35+ client servers, good luck finding 1 active oper on each server!!!) when you'd need a network-wide ban to be placed, and fast.

i've rarely seen where a kline is that much of an emergency that it needs to be placed 'fast' and since most servers allow glines, you might only have 1-2 servers to msg individually not 35+

lucy wrote:maybe its how you approach opers or something.... cause i've never ever had a problem finding a prison oper.

All depends on the time of the day. We're not gonna list all abuse-friendly servers and if their opers are competent, active and covering all the 24 hours of the day.

lucy wrote:i've rarely seen where a kline is that much of an emergency that it needs to be placed 'fast' and since most servers allow glines, you might only have 1-2 servers to msg individually not 35+

That's exactly the problem: "most servers", so abusing lamers knows which servers to pick to do their stuff.

Also, not any ircop is allowed to place g-lines. I guess local opers is a good example. Once you find an ircop who can place g-lines, he'll be limited to any server but the abuse-friendly ones.

You know the dead-end story.
Have a good one.

lucy wrote: i've rarely seen where a kline is that much of an emergency that it needs to be placed 'fast' and since most servers allow glines, you might only have 1-2 servers to msg individually not 35+

Well, I know one situation where it'd have had some devastating(but proper) effect. Unfortunately, I was the target. I'm not going to get into efnet politics here (been there, done that, placed on ground zero and nuked to a crisp), but it involved something to a degree where the next thing would have been worth the equivalent of a g-line at the time the event(s) happened. That's where a g-line/multiserver k-line would be usable, for the most absolute and persistent offenders- be it from multiple netblock floodnets down to those persistent "tempest in a teapot" clients.